This blog addresses the fatal flaw at the core of capitalism as a system of human psycho-socio-political-economic collective self-reproduction, a flaw which ultimately renders it a self-DIS-organizing, self-destroying system -- as is becoming increasingly evident. It also details the successor system to capitalism, the new system that represents the higher, positive way forward for humanity: Political-ECONOMIC DEMOCRACY, or EQUITISM.

Sunday, March 18, 2018

The PsychohistoricalDialectic of Human-Social Formation(s)-- PDFofnewpresentation.

Dear Readers,

FYI:The F.E.D. General Council has just
approved release of anewpresentation on the ‘Seldonian psychohistorical-dialecticalmeta-equation’
known as ‘TheMeta-EquationofHuman-SocialFormationsMeta-Evolution’.

An earlier, less-detailed presentation of this ‘meta-model’ is available in the
PDF text reachable via the following URL --

The HistoricalDialectic of Human-Social Formation(s) toEpoch3-- New Summary‘Dialectogram’ depicting ‘allo-hybrid’ as well as ‘auto-hybrid’
socio-ontological
categories for thefirsttime for our depictions of [psycho]HISTORICALdialectics.

Dear Readers,

The F.E.D.
General Council has just approved release of anew, summary‘dialectogram’
for the ‘Seldonian psychohistorical-dialecticalmeta-equation’ known as ‘TheMeta-EquationofHuman-SocialFormationsMeta-Evolution’.Further exposition of this ‘meta-model’
is available in the PDF text reachable via the following URL --

“Despite the enduring fascination of a potentially large
audience, continuing generation after generation, in Asimov's Foundation
series, and in its mathematical social science of "psychohistory", no
movie of that series has yet been made.I think that this is for three main reasons.”

“One, there is a very advanced, profoundly Marxian quality
to the "lawful" progression of epochs in the
"psychohistorical" development of the First Foundation that is
anathema to the Big Money "powers that be", who do not want to see
this kind of "social scientific" thinking broached among the middle
classes, potentially replacing those interests' carefully inculcated
"divide-and-conquer" Balkanization of those classes, with
"theories" of racial bigotry, religious bigotry, ethnic bigotry,
class bigotry, etc., that keep those classes fighting among themselves, not
recognizing their real arch enemy.”

“Second, the kind of "psychohistorical" thinking
that pervades Asimov's Foundation stories is alien to the mentality of so many
Hollywood screen writers.”

“Third, there is no single, Rambo-style action hero in the
Foundation stories, which span generations, and therefore foster a kind of
long-term, historical thinking that is unfamiliar to many movie-goers.”

“There may be no movie, but there is a group working to
actualize Asimov's "psychohistory" at Earth scale.See www.dialectics.org
.”

Dear Readers,

The following is an
excerpt from that interview --

“The coherence of Marxism rests upon an attempted synthesis of materialism
and the Hegelian dialectic.What exactly
is meant by such a synthesis has been a subject of great debate.A particularly problematic character in this
debate has been Lenin. Lenin’s philosophy, as expressed mainly in Materialism
and Empirio-Criticism and his Philosophical Notebooks, is
quite ambiguous and perhaps contradictory — he seems never quite able to
resolve the synthesis between the Hegelian dialectic and materialism.At Lenin’s worst, his philosophy reduces to a
“reflection theory,” and what Axelrod called “naive realism.”At his best, Lenin wrestles with the attempt
to “apply dialectics to… the process and development of knowledge,” but the
issue was never really resolved in his writings.Due to the eventual canonization of these
problematic texts, these ambiguities would lead to great disputes in Soviet
Marxism, and consequently in Marxism more generally, ranging widely from the
metaphysical to the positivistic.Eventually, Soviet “dialectical materialism” would largely be reduced to
mechanistic materialism, with the “dialectic” a mere superficial stylistic
ornament, the ambiguity of which could be deployed for political purposes.Partially in response, much of the academic
work of “Western Marxism” moved in the other direction, abdicating claims to
the natural sciences, eventually leading to what you call “proto-postmodern
relativism”...”

I posted the following comment to this interview, aiming to open
a dialogue with the interviewee:

“It might be interesting to consider, in regard to the topic
of this interview, the work of a project for the resurrection and renaissance
of Marxian theory. This project involves the derivation of a dialectical
progression of systems of ‘dialectical ideography’, i.e., of “mathematics of
dialectics”, via the immanent critique of the ideological vitiations prevailing
in modern mathematics.This project sees
Karl Marx, certainly not as a “neuroscientist”, but as “the greatest
psychohistorian that Terran humanity has so far produced”, using the term
'“psychohistorian”' in a critical, Marxian re-visioning of its Asimovian
meaning.Per this project, Marx’s theory
should be characterized as a ‘psychohistorical materialism’, and decidedly not
as any kind of pseudo-materialist actual Idealism of the Abstract Idea of
“Matter”.Also per this project,
Leninism and its various offspring should be regarded as predictable
degenerations -- predictable via Marxian theory -- of Marxian theory itself
into an ideology in support of neo-Jacobinist putschist parties, and of the
totalitarian state-bureaucratic national ruling classes to which their
“successful” coup d’etat lead, in the semi-periphery of core capitalism,
in the form of state-capitalist nation-states, as a new pathway for the
“primitive accumulation” of industrial capital.This work is available for free download via http://www.dialectics.org .”

The following is an
excerpt from that blog-entry --

“Introduction to the system of dialectical logic

The work of Ivan Punchev entitled “Introduction to the system of
dialectical logic” is composed by four books dedicated to one of the most
fundamental and most difficult problems in philosophy. This is building of integral system of
rational dialectical logic. Currently such system exists (as a mystical type)
only in Hegel, and in rational form this logic was applied only in Marx’s
“Capital”. Despite the efforts of many
philosophers for more than a century, solution to this problem has not been achieved
​​entirely.The problem is further
complicated with the advent of the mathematical logic as a historic new stage
in the development of formal logic.This
situation is related also with the famous “third crisis” in the foundations of
mathematics started by the introduction of the mathematical concept of infinity
in Set Theory and the consequently raised antinomies.At the same time, the mathematical logic
created a new standard for contemporary systematization of any scientific
knowledge and thus put a requirement for mathematical modeling of the classic
dialectical logic.This issue is central
to the four volumes.In its context are
studied problems of the history of the idea of a mathematical dialectical logic
and dialectical mathematics. The scale and depth of this problematic
situation require exploration of all main ideas in philosophy, logic and
mathematics.This determines the nature
of this study as integrative, interdisciplinary and complex.”

I posted the following comment to this blog-entry, hoping to
open a dialogue with the blog-entry’s author:

“It might be interesting to compare the work of Dr. Punchev
with that of another project which has also derived a “new non-classical
mathematical dialectics and dialectical mathematics”. In the case of this other
project, their first “mathematics of dialectics” is both a ‘contra-Boolean’
algebra for dialectical logic, and a non-standard model of the Peano “Natural”
numbers arithmetic, such as was foretold by both the Lowenheim-Skolem Theorem, and
the “first order” logic co-application of the Goedel Completeness and
Incompleteness Theorems. This work is available for free download via http://www.dialectics.org .”

We have publicly stated, for some years,
in discussions of the meaning of the future ontological category denoted,
algebraically, as the ‘‘‘algebraic unknown’’’ category described by
the terms ‘qhh’
or ‘Delta qh’ or ‘Delta_h’,
and solved, by us, as
y=qy,
standing for ‘meta-humanity’, that presently, at least in the ‘Terran
locus’, wherein we
have sufficient scrutiny to know the ontological details as to what is
presently extant, that the predicted y ontological category is
presently-existent/extant, in this locus, only ‘‘‘fractionally’’’ [partially, ‘d’], in a qualitative, ontological sense.

That is, what is presently extant of y, at
least ‘‘‘locally’’’, is the quality dy, not yet the quality y as a whole.

However, with the circa21 January 2018
report(s) of the editing of the genotypes of 86
humans, in China, using, probably, the CRISPR/Cas9-gRNA or CRISPR/Cpf1-crRNA biomolecular genome-editing tools, we
must conclude that Terran humanity
has reached the threshold, technologically if not yet socio-politically, of the potential to create
a ‘meta-human’
genome -- «species» 1
of our
predicted «genos» of ‘meta-humanity’.

CRISPR is an
acronym for “Clustered Regularly Interspersed Short
Palindromic Repeats” in prokaryote DNA -- in
both many bacterial prokaryotes,
and, perhaps even more prevalently, in ‘archaean’ prokaryotes.It is a key part of an ancient “unicellular”
immune system, enabling prokaryotes to resist the ravages of alien, e.g.,
viral/phage, DNA, that has been injected into their interiors.

Thus, Terran humanity may soon, historically speaking, have
to navigate the complex interactions among a global movement against degenerating, tendentially
totalitarian, ‘‘‘humanocidal’’’ national state-capitalisms, and for a first-ever ‘GlobalRenaissance’, rooted
in the creation of a unified ‘planetary polis’, founded upon ‘equitarian
political-economicdemocracy’, and the
global emergence of ‘the self-re-engineering of the human genome’, as well as
with possible ‘co-emergences’ of the second, ‘‘‘android robotics’’’ «species», and of the third, ‘‘‘cyborg
prosthetics/bionics’’’ «species», of our
predicted ‘irruption of the meta-human’.